Talk:Radio Times

Boycott

"It was founded in 1923, and originally carried details of BBC radio programmes in response to a newspaper boycott of radio listings." What was the reason for this boycott? Anyone know any more about this? — Trilobite 20:11, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

I can't find any specific information which backs this statement up, but I suspect it might have something to do with the difficult relationship between newspaper proprietors and the BBC in its early years. (The proprietors were fearful of the impact of the BBC on their circulation figures I believe) Drc79 11:06, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Speculation, of course, but in the early days of the British Broadcasting Company (as it was then) the announcers used to read out news from the newspapers. The BBC only really started doing news in earnest in 1926, when the General Strike crippled newspaper production and distribution and the British Broadcasting Company emerged as a potential propaganda tool for the government--which resulted in a fierce battle between Lord Reith and the government over the BBC's editorial independence. But that's another story. --Jenny (recently changed username) 17:21, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Improbable?

I performed this removal because it seemed improbable, but now I'm not so sure. Is my memory playing tricks? Did the BBC and ITV really not display one another's listings prior to deregulation?

Until deregulation of television listings in 1991, the Radio Times carried only listings for BBC channels, while the ITV-published magazine, the TV Times, carried only ITV and (from 1982) Channel Four listings.

Does anybody have a source to confirm or refute this? --Jenny (recently changed username) 17:21, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah, here's one that is good enough for the purpose. [1]. --Jenny 10:54, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for researching and finding the ref :) Stephenb (Talk) 19:15, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes it does seem incredible now that for years you had to shell out for two different magazines to get details of only three TV channels. (81.129.3.32 (talk) 09:23, 24 April 2009 (UTC))

Cover usage

I was thinking of adding something about this cover, which was recently chosen as the "best British magazine cover of all time". But there are already two Doctor Who-related images in the article, and a third seems excessive even to a hardcore Who fan like me. (That said, from an image use point of view the cover with the least textual justification is the EastEnders one.) The "best of all time" cover seems encyclopedic to me, and I suppose it could replace the Frank Bellamy pic (lovely as it is). Would anyone object? Anyone have any other thoughts? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 22:11, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I've no objection to changing the Christmas one that I scanned and uploaded. Although a Who fan, I actually uploaded it as an example of the annual Christmas artwork cover, which just happened to be "Who"-related that year. :) I agree that the winning cover deserves to be there somewhere. Note that the Frank Bellamy cover is also used on his article, so it wouldn't be lost. Stephenb (Talk) 07:16, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

I'd rather not change the Christmas cover, partly because the tradition of Christmas covers is discussed in the article, and partly because it's so nice. I suppose I'll replace the Bellamy pic, then. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 08:07, 2 October 2008 (UTC)